Developing a drought-monitoring index for the contiguous US using SMAP

Abstract. Since April 2015, NASA's Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) mission has monitored near-surface soil moisture, mapping the globe (between 85.044∘ N/S) using an L-band (1.4 GHz) microwave radiometer in 2–3 days depending on location. Of particular interest to SMAP-based agricultural applications is a monitoring product that assesses the SMAP near-surface soil moisture in terms of probability percentiles for dry and wet conditions. However, the short SMAP record length poses a statistical challenge for meaningful assessment of its indices. This study presents initial insights about using SMAP for monitoring drought and pluvial regions with a first application over the contiguous United States (CONUS). SMAP soil moisture data from April 2015 to December 2017 at both near-surface (5 cm) SPL3SMP, or Level 3, at ∼36 km resolution, and root-zone SPL4SMAU, or Level 4, at ∼9 km resolution, were fitted to beta distributions and were used to construct probability distributions for warm (May–October) and cold (November–April) seasons. To assess the data adequacy and have confidence in using short-term SMAP for a drought index estimate, we analyzed individual grids by defining two filters and a combination of them, which could separate the 5815 grids covering CONUS into passed and failed grids. The two filters were (1) the Kolmogorov–Smirnov (KS) test for beta-fitted long-term and the short-term variable infiltration capacity (VIC) land surface model (LSM) with 95 % confidence and (2) good correlation (≥0.4) between beta-fitted VIC and beta-fitted SPL3SMP. To evaluate which filter is the best, we defined a mean distance (MD) metric, assuming a VIC index at 36 km resolution as the ground truth. For both warm and cold seasons, the union of the filters – which also gives the best coverage of the grids throughout CONUS – was chosen to be the most reliable filter. We visually compared our SMAP-based drought index maps with metrics such as the U.S. Drought Monitor (from D0–D4), 1-month Standard Precipitation Index (SPI) and near-surface VIC from Princeton University. The root-zone drought index maps were shown to be similar to those produced by the root-zone VIC, 3-month SPI, and the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE). This study is a step forward towards building a national and international soil moisture monitoring system without which quantitative measures of drought and pluvial conditions will remain difficult to judge.

[1]  Qiusheng Wu,et al.  Evaluation of AMSR2 soil moisture products over the contiguous United States using in situ data from the International Soil Moisture Network , 2016, Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinformation.

[2]  S. Shukla,et al.  Use of a standardized runoff index for characterizing hydrologic drought , 2008 .

[3]  K. Mo,et al.  The modified Palmer drought severity index based on the NCEP North American regional reanalysis , 2006 .

[4]  R. Koster,et al.  Assessment and Enhancement of MERRA Land Surface Hydrology Estimates , 2011 .

[5]  José Martínez-Fernández,et al.  Satellite soil moisture for agricultural drought monitoring: Assessment of the SMOS derived Soil Water Deficit Index , 2016 .

[6]  M. Rodell,et al.  Assimilation of GRACE Terrestrial Water Storage Data into a Land Surface Model: Results for the Mississippi River Basin , 2008 .

[7]  L. Tallaksen,et al.  Hydrological drought : processes and estimation methods for streamflow and groundwater , 2004 .

[8]  A. Al Bitar,et al.  Overview of SMOS performance in terms of global soil moisture monitoring after six years in operation , 2016 .

[9]  Wade T. Crow,et al.  Assessment of the SMAP Level-4 surface and root-zone soil moisture product using in situ measurements , 2017 .

[10]  A. Robock,et al.  The Global Soil Moisture Data Bank , 2000 .

[11]  Gabrielle J. M. De Lannoy,et al.  SMAP Level 4 Surface and Root Zone Soil Moisture , 2016, 2016 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS).

[12]  Wade T. Crow,et al.  The Contributions of Precipitation and Soil Moisture Observations to the Skill of Soil Moisture Estimates in a Land Data Assimilation System , 2011 .

[13]  D. Wilhite,et al.  CHAPfER2UNDERSTANDING THE DROUGHT PHENOMENON:THE ROLE OF DEFINITIONS , 1985 .

[14]  Jiancheng Shi,et al.  The Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) Mission , 2010, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[15]  Joseph A. Santanello,et al.  Irrigation Signals Detected From SMAP Soil Moisture Retrievals , 2017 .

[16]  E. Wood,et al.  A Drought Monitoring and Forecasting System for Sub-Sahara African Water Resources and Food Security , 2014 .

[17]  Eric F. Wood,et al.  Assessing the skill of satellite‐based precipitation estimates in hydrologic applications , 2010 .

[18]  J. Eitzinger,et al.  The ASCAT Soil Moisture Product: A Review of its Specifications, Validation Results, and Emerging Applications , 2013 .

[19]  Arnaud Mialon,et al.  The SMOS Soil Moisture Retrieval Algorithm , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[20]  W. Wagner,et al.  Soil moisture estimation through ASCAT and AMSR-E sensors: An intercomparison and validation study across Europe , 2011 .

[21]  Wouter Dorigo,et al.  A Preliminary Study toward Consistent Soil Moisture from AMSR2 , 2015 .

[22]  E. Wood,et al.  A simulated soil moisture based drought analysis for the United States , 2004 .

[23]  Dara Entekhabi,et al.  An initial assessment of SMAP soil moisture retrievals using high‐resolution model simulations and in situ observations , 2016 .

[24]  E. Wood,et al.  Representation of Terrestrial Hydrology and Large-Scale Drought of the Continental United States from the North American Regional Reanalysis , 2012 .

[25]  Fabio Castelli,et al.  Mutual interaction of soil moisture state and atmospheric processes , 1996 .

[26]  Wade T. Crow,et al.  Validation of SMAP soil moisture for the SMAPVEX15 field campaign using a hyper‐resolution model , 2017 .

[27]  M. Svoboda An Introduction to the Drought Monitor , 2000 .